To the cause of war

[Nick]

Also, notice the type of people going against the war. Most are post secondary school students, minorities, etc.. People that are against Republicans is what it comes down to. Somtimes left wingers need to think whats best for the country instead of best for them.

yea man, i was just about to say that about the protests. Basically all of the people there that were protesting were low class, dirty, trying to make a name for themselves because no one likes them type of people. Also a lot of minorities there like you said.

 

[Vehementi]

Bomb them, shoot them, loot them, make them pump out all the oil under their land and give it to us...then move on to the next oil country, to begin this all over again. This seems to be Bush's mindset. The "Saddam is cruel and unusual and needs to die" is just sugarcoating. Bush wants war. Removing Saddam Hussein from power will put him in great financial standings after his term has ended, he gets cheaper oil. That's all he wants. He's greedy. Everyone in this country is greedy, our president especially!

A gift to the American people! Free oil to warm your house for life, and the .25 cent a gallon gas for your car!

 

[TS | Crazyace]

That post is slightly demented dude..

 

[Nick]

agreed

 

[mrslippyfist]

Originally posted by Nick
Basically all of the people there that were protesting were low class, dirty, trying to make a name for themselves because no one likes them type of people. Also a lot of minorities there like you said.

Uh, although Im not American and hence probably have a lesser understanding of the system over there, doesn't everybody have the same right to a view, surely the government policy should be shaped by these views, hence these people are trying to make a differance. Why shouldn't those who are opposed voice there opinions? Here in London there was a peace march at the weekend, in which 1 million people took part, thats 1/60 of the population of the country, and just in London. Thats a helluva lot of dirty, low class people expressing their views.
And whats wrong with minorities, THAT sounds kinda racist don't you think?

 

[Phantasm66]

Originally posted by Vehementi
Bomb them, shoot them, loot them, make them pump out all the oil under their land and give it to us...then move on to the next oil country, to begin this all over again. This seems to be Bush's mindset. The "Saddam is cruel and unusual and needs to die" is just sugarcoating. Bush wants war. Removing Saddam Hussein from power will put him in great financial standings after his term has ended, he gets cheaper oil. That's all he wants. He's greedy. Everyone in this country is greedy, our president especially!

A gift to the American people! Free oil to warm your house for life, and the .25 cent a gallon gas for your car!

I think reducing the whole situation to oil alone is kind of a little bit stupid.

If you really want cheap oil, you do some kind of a deal with Saddam. You certainly don't turn the middle east into a war zone, that's the last thing you want.

Oil is probably in there somewhere, but I think that in all honesty the UK and USA do have good reasons for what they want to do. They probably have much better evidence than has been made public, they just can't reveal it and how they got it.

 

[Nick]

Originally posted by Phantasm66
I think reducing the whole situation to oil alone is kind of a little bit stupid.

If you really want cheap oil, you do some kind of a deal with Saddam. You certainly don't turn the middle east into a war zone, that's the last thing you want.

Oil is probably in there somewhere, but I think that in all honesty the UK and USA do have good reasons for what they want to do. They probably have much better evidence than has been made public, they just can't reveal it and how they got it.

very true, u.s intelligence is incredible. i dont think its about oil.

 

[SNGX1275]

Originally posted by mrslippyfist
If the UN is dissolved, there will be nobody looking over countries shoulders saying you can't do that.
Agreed, the UN doesn't have much power to stop a large nation from action, but it is the best solution available.

Anyway, I don't know why US citizens need to worry, its not as if saddam could actually launch an attack on US soil, he doesn't have any rockets capable of that range. This war is more about oil, and is only going to annoy more fundementalists, which in turn is going to create a larger terrorist threat.

Doesn't appear to me that the UN has had much involvement in making Iraq hold up to those resolutions that it passed in the early 90s. You say the UN doesn't have much power to stop a large nation, well they also seem to be having a lot of problems making a smaller nation uphold its end.

US citizens don't need to worry? Maybe not a direct strike from Saddam on our mainland, but what about all our citizens in other countries, either as ambassadors, vacationers, or soldiers protecting the human rights of citizens of other countries. Saddam has known ties to terrorism, I bet France and Germany may think differently if they had 2 of their countries biggest buildings full of innocent civilians plowed into by 2 passenger jets, killing over 2,000 people who never had a chance to survive.

War about oil? About how the US wants cheap oil? I can argue all day on the economics of oil in the US and how if the price of oil raises around $9 a barrel how the US can do quite fine on its own reserves. But instead I'll present to you this.... France/Germany/Russia all have extensive oil contracts with Iraq too, so how can you argue the US is going to war exclusively for oil when under that same logic you could say that the UN countries opposed just want to protect their contracts.

 

[Nick]

good points sngx

 

[conradguerrero]

There are so many reasons to argue for or against war with Iraq.

To me, it seems that there is no middle ground, that people either are totally for the war or totally against it.

Here is one of my arguments:

1. We must prevent the next 9/11.

This is used in both pro-war and anti-war candadates.

The reason that I know this is wrong for anti-war arguments is that this idea that another 9/11 will only occur IF we become aggressive is very similar to the complacency right before world war 2. The U.S. and it's allies did not war with Hitler for several years because they did not want to go to war again. They foolishly believed that bending to Nazi Germany would let Hitler "blow off some steam". It did not; instead, Hitler perceived weakness and struck, sending the world into world war 2.

So what am I getting at?

Will we let rogue states defy the world, because we are afraid of war? Iraq is not strong enough (anymore) to invade it's neighboors by conventional means. How hard would it be for Iraq to smuggle WOMD into a terrorists hands? How easy is it to smuggle into America? America has a huge open border with Canada.

This is the new age of War, no longer must a hostile nation declare war. They mearly must deliver money and weapons to individuals bent to a single purpose - terrorism. When the attack is sucessful, the hostile nation says, "we are so shocked!" or, "We are so happy, we didn't do it though!" A nuclear weapon can fit inside a regular vehicle, set off within a mile of a target almost guarantees a hit.

America's preempive strike against a known, hostile state that is known to have the capability to create WOMD will be vindicated by the ABSENCE of another 9/11.

I should also note that many historians believe that World War 2 came about in Europe because Germany was burdened by huge debts to the humiliating treaty signed after World War 1. I believe World War 3 never arrived because we learned from out mistakes and rebuilt war-torn Europe and forgived much blame and debt owed to America. Such is what happened in Japan, America nurtured a democracy and now Japan is one of the weathiest and peaceful nations. The rebuilding of Europe has been recreated in Afghanistan and the democratic beginings in Japan will be shown in Iraq.

America does not want to attack and rule the world. We usually just conduct peaceful trade and let time sort it out. It has become clear that without the attack on Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden would still be plotting to blow up more Western nations. Is it not clear that without an attack on Iraq, Saddam will continue to create WOMD? Saddam is the new Hitler of today, thinking, "that if you just give me enough time, I'll show you not to attack me."

He has the money.

Check out the latest temple he bult that cost millions of dollars.

He has the technology

Spy pictures portray movement of moblie labs, Iraqi scientists hide documents inside their homes, Iraq is said to have underground weapons research facilities (America will not admit it knows the locations for fear of their abandonment and having to locate the new labs.)

He has the supplies

UN inspectors are not convinced that Iraq has destroyed all of it's banned matierials.

All he need now is time . . .

 

[DogStar]

I think that Bush is after Iraqs oil.Saddam has stated he will set fire to every oil well if need be.Why would he be prepared to do this to his countries main revenue, if not for the reason that Bush wants/needs it. If this war eventuates the losers are going to be the civilians of Iraq.How many will die from wayward bombs/missiles this time, but more importantly, who will cry out for justice in their names.The American administration? I doubt it.
Don't get me wrong.I am not sympathising with Saddam, but the everyday people of Iraq (who are the same as you and I), whom will once again suffer at the hands of Saddam and Bush.
We could argue facts and figures till the cows come home, but unfortunately it will be the people that suffer, as it always is in any war. I don't profess to have the answers but I do know that war is not the answer. I'd like to think that we as humanity would be able to work it out without war, but alas such is the nature of man.

 

[Nodsu]

US intelligence is so good that all the spy satellites and spy planes and spy people are able to come up with only a couple of foggy pictures of something. Really good job, fellas.

Preventing 9/11 - death of 5000 and destruction of a couple of buildings by killing tens of thousands and levelling hundreds of buildings - that's really logical.

 

[Nick]

Originally posted by mrslippyfist
Uh, although Im not American and hence probably have a lesser understanding of the system over there, doesn't everybody have the same right to a view, surely the government policy should be shaped by these views, hence these people are trying to make a differance. Why shouldn't those who are opposed voice there opinions? Here in London there was a peace march at the weekend, in which 1 million people took part, thats 1/60 of the population of the country, and just in London. Thats a helluva lot of dirty, low class people expressing their views.
And whats wrong with minorities, THAT sounds kinda racist don't you think?

Well it's because you don't see the higher up class people doing this. It's these people with huge opinions that try to critisize the goverment for everything that they do. You don't see higher class people doing this because they are higher class, they aren't little rats crawling the streets trying to beat up security guards holding them back. They start riots and everything trying to make a name for themselves and they hate our goverment. They are mad at the goverment because THEY themselves can't make a living because they were dumb enough to make a stupid decision in their life not to get an education ect.

And yes I do have a large opinion about minorities. The percent of minorities that cause crimes in this nation is astronomical. Just look at the facts, a lot of them are scum. They crawl to our nation and pollute it with their disgusting crimes and unhuman ways of life.

 

[stevewal]

I strongly disagree with any war, going to war should be the very last step to take ...
Saddam is a dictator, no question about that ... but he is not the only one, and some of the other dictators still around are supported by the USA.
For those of you who wanting to be informed in a more complete way, you should have a look at the site of : www.alternet.org
They can give you a lot of reasons and a more diverse and complete information, different from the information you get from the big media-moguls.
NO WAR - NEVER - because it's allways the little man who suffers and eventually gets killed !!!! Don't wait untill the bodybags are coming home ...

Stevewal

 

[Vehementi]

Originally posted by Nodsu
Preventing 9/11 - death of 5000 and destruction of a couple of buildings by killing tens of thousands and levelling hundreds of buildings - that's really logical.

2,800 actually.

Originally posted by Nick
very true, u.s intelligence is incredible. i dont think its about oil.

Uhh, that's an oxymoron.

 

[Phantasm66]

Originally posted by Vehementi
Uhh, that's an oxymoron.

And you are a *****.

Sorry but I could not resist that.

Veh, quit nitpicking. So someone got the figure of the people killed in 9/11 incorrect - it doesn't detract from their point.

I am not sure whether I agree with war or not. I do feel sorry for the Iraqi people. But Saddam is a bit of a nutter, and I think its time that he went. The world needs less people like that, not more. Whether he was involved in 9/11 or not doesn't really matter to me. He is capable of something like that, whether or not it was actually him on that occassion. It could be Saddam in the future, I think.

We need to completely remove Saddam from power, and remove his power base. I am sorry, but maybe that is going to take a war, and its only war that can do it. I don't know. If there was another way that I would jump at it, but I am not decided either way that there is.

 

[conradguerrero]

Not an oxymoron Veh, only opinions.

u.s intelligence is incredible - opinion one

i dont think its about oil - opinion two

 

[conradguerrero]

Here's a real oxymoron = Microsoft Works!

 

[stevewal]

u.s intelligence is incredible ?????????????
Don't make me laugh, that's why Powell and Blair have to use a report that has been circulating on the internet for over 10 years !!!!
The only thing they they know for certain is about the arms they sold Saddam during het Irak-Iran war, actually the man acting as US representative during that time was Rumsfeld ...

 

[conradguerrero]

so in one sentence you claim American intelligence is nonexisitent, and in the other you hint at some shadow conspiracy towards other nations?

 

[Phantasm66]

Originally posted by stevewal
why Powell and Blair have to use a report that has been circulating on the internet for over 10 years !!!!

If you are talking about stealing from the graduate thesis, then I think that smacks more of laziness than anything else.

 

[stevewal]

I don't think they can afford it being lazy ... with more and more countries opposed to war (without backing of the UN). Everybody is overwhelmed by the enormous response last weekend, millions around the globe marching against the war !!!
... and especially European leaders (even Tony Blair) are getting cold feet : all polls say that 70% to even 80% of their populations are against this war !!!

 

[conradguerrero]

Americans are not complacent, it is (mainly) our troops, our weapons, our money which will be used in the coming war.

Though I do not believe it, many people are saying Europe has forgotten whose entry into WWII changed the course in Europe, Africa, and Asia. Does Europe remember the 300,000 dead soldiers or the Marshall Plan? I would say French Gaulianism is spreading ....

 

[Rick]

Violent protests are uncalled for... But so is this entire war thing.

We started swinging out big stick around before we even had one shred of evidence that Iraq had the capacity to build mass destruction weapons - And funnily enough - It's still a cloudy proposition.

War in any degree, is very silly and primitive. A peaceful resolution should be aggresively sought after before wasting billions of dollars and possibly lives on an almost useless war which no one else wants to backup. At the very least, we should wait for the rest of the U.N. to join in, but we do not.

Our troops are going to be split among 3 different countries (America by no means has the largest standing army) and this is a very poor strategy for winning anything.

The main thing that has always bothered me though.. Is that American officials began planning on how to divide up Iraqi oil BEFORE we even officially decided we "might" launch a war. It was on CNN. That pretty much says it all.

I'm all for making the world a safer place, but there are other methods of doing this and two other situations we need to pay attention to before we go pounding on Iraq's door.

 

[Phantasm66]

Originally posted by Rick
War in any degree, is very silly and primitive. A peaceful resolution should be aggresively sought after before wasting billions of dollars and possibly lives on an almost useless war which no one else wants to backup. At the very least, we should wait for the rest of the U.N. to join in, but we do not.

That's all very well, Rick.

But you are assuming that the rest of the world is as intelligent, humane and civilised as you.

They are not.

For some people, some groups, some regimes and some countries, war is all they understand.

You are talking about a country that makes a mockery of democracy; you are talking about a leader that gives orders to gas his own people.

In the end, the only thing that could stop Hitler was war. Maybe that is all that can stop Saddam.





...oh, and another thing.

Look at how unpopular this is all making Tony Blair.

Ths could even cost him the next general election if this all draws out....

You think he doesn't know this?

Sure he does. And he's willing to risk it anyway.

And that's very likely because he DOES have good reasons.